Brown
People v. Brown
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Perluss, J.
Quamie Brown was convicted following a jury trial of two counts of assault with a deadly weapon. On appeal Brown contends the guilty verdicts for aggravated assault, as opposed to the lesser included offense of simple assault, are not supported by substantial evidence and the court committed prejudicial error in instructing the jury with the erroneous definition of “deadly weapon” contained in CALCRIM No. 875. Although we agree CALCRIM No. 875’s definition of “deadly weapon,” which includes objects that are inherently “dangerous” as well as inherently “deadly,” is, at best, ambiguous and, at worst, overbroad, any instructional error was harmless, and Brown’s two convictions are amply supported by the record. Accordingly, we affirm.
*5 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
1. The Information
Brown was charged in an amended information with six counts of assault with a deadly weapon, “to wit, [a] BB gun” (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)). 1 As to each count it was also specially alleged the offense was committed to benefit a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)). Brown pleaded not guilty and denied the special gang allegation.
2. The Trial